文献出处：Weyerbrock, S., & Xia, T. (2010). Technical trade barriers in US/Europe agricultural trade. Agribusiness, 16(2), 235-251.
Technical Trade Barriers in US/Europe
Agricultural Trade
Silvia Weyerbrock and Tian Xia
ABSTRACT
Technical barriers strongly affect US/European agricultural and food trade. A 1996 USDA survey identifies 57 questionable European regulations affecting US agricultural exports with an estimated trade impact of $899.55 million. This article identifies European and US technical regulations that impede bilateral trade. The article provides a background for case studies and draws conclusions regarding the future role of technical barriers. We expect that technical barriers in US/Europe trade will proliferate in the future because of changes in trade rules, higher demand for food safety and various food quality attributes, and EU membership of Eastern European countries. ? 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
1. INTRODUCTION
Technical trade barriers strongly impede trade in agricultural and food products. In this article we use the term technical barriers to trade (TBTs) to refer to obstacles arising from both sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical regulations and measures. Although such regulations and measures are frequently motivated by domestic health and safety concerns, they may be used as non-transparent, difficult-to-challenge trade barriers.A1996 US Department of Agriculture (USDA) survey finds that the US may be losing $4.97 billion exports because of questionable regulations (Thornsbury, Roberts, DeRemer, & Orden, 1997; Roberts & DeRemer, 1997). In future, technical barriers are likely to increase because of increased demand for food and environmental safety.
Moreover, owing to the recent strengthening of World Trade Organization (WTO) rules on traditional barriers such as tariffs and quantitative non-tariff barriers, countries may substitute traditional by technical barriers (Roberts & DeRemer, 1997; Hooker and Caswell, 1995; Wang and Caswell, 1997). Finally, new technologies and new products will lead to changes in regulatory policies, which may create trade frictions.
This article identifies European and US SPS and technical barriers that impede bilateral food trade. We concentrate on US/Europe agricultural trade for four reasons:
1. Europe is an important trading partner of the US. In 1997, 20% of US exports were directed to Europe, while 20.6% of US imports originated from Europe (USDA/ FAS, 1998).
2. A 1996 USDA survey, put together by Roberts and DeRemer, identifies 57 questionable European regulations affecting US agricultural exports with an estimated trade impact of $899.55 million. Six regulations account for 61.8% of the trade impact (Thornsbury et al., 1997; Roberts & DeRemer, 1997). For confidentiality reasons, Roberts and DeRemer could not identify specific issues. Our article identifies recent and current specific European and US technical barriers that affect bilateral food trade.
3. Given their high income, US and European consumers demand a high level of food and environmental safety. Moreover, the strong US and European farmers’ lobbies demand support. The efforts of both groups will contribute to stricter SPS and technical regulations and the growing incidence of technical trade barriers.
4. Europe and the US are pioneers in developing new technologies and products and, therefore, new regulations.
The literature on technical barriers is in its infancy. This is due to the lack of a commonly agreed upon definition and comprehensive data on the incidence of these measures. Moreover, estimating the trade and welfare effects of technical barriers is difficult. Roberts and DeRemer (1997) describe several challenges. One challenge is to estimate compliance costs based on often merely qualitative information. Estimating the
benefits of technical barriers is also difficult, because they may be based on preventing low-probability, highconsequence events. Finally, because of the bilateral nature of many technical barriers, economic models need to incorporate product differentiation and market power.
Most empirical studies of technical barriers at this point consist of case studies that provide evidence of specific disputes (Ndayisenga & Kinsey, 1994). Other researchers or policymakers have put a figure on selected technical barriers by approximating the amount of trade affected by the regulation. The objective of this article is to pinpoint questionable technical barriers in US/Europe trade. The survey provides a background for case studies and permits conclusions regarding the future role of technical barriers in US/Europe trade. In Section 2, we provide an overview of agricultural trade between the US and Europe. Section 3 defines technical trade barriers and surveys WTO rules applying to such measures. In Section 4, we first report results of the 1996 USDA survey on technical trade barriers (Thornsbury et al., in press; Roberts & DeRemer, 1997). We then identify specific problem areas. Section 5 includes our conclusion.
2. TRADE
This section surveys bilateral US/Europe trade and trade within Europe of agricultural and food products. For this purpose, we divide most of Europe into three blocs: the European Union (EU), Eastern Europe (EE), and the former Soviet Union (FSU)/Russia.
2.1. US/Europe Trade
In 1997, the US agricultural exports to European countries amounted to $11.3 billion and US imports from Europe to $7.4 billion (Table 1). Twenty percent of US exports were directed to Europe, whereas 21.4% of US imports originated from Europe (USDA/FAS, 1998).US/EU. Within Europe, the EU is the largest export market for US food products. In 1997, 77.9% of US exports to Europe went to the EU. Major US exports are soybeans, feed and fodder, and tree nuts. The EU is also the dominant European source of US agricultural and food imports. The US imported $7 billion agricultural
goods from the EU—mainly snack food, vegetable oils, and cheese (USDA/FAS, 1998). US/Russia. The second most important trading partner of the US in Europe, the FSU, received $1.5 billion of US agricultural exports (Table 1). More than 80% of these exports (mainly poultry meat, red meat, and wheat) go to Russia. US poultry exports are highly dependent on the Russian market. Russia’s imports from the US vastly exceeded its exports to the US of $29 million. The US imports Russian dairy products, hides and skins, and essential oils (USDA/FAS, 1998). US/Eastern Europe. The agricultural and food trade between the US and Eastern Europe has been volatile in recent years. In 1997, the US merely exported $282 million US agricultural goods to Eastern European countries. Wheat, poultry meat, and coarse grains dominate US exports. The US import shares for Poland, Romania, Hungary, and the Czech Republic are 5.7%, 8.0%, 4.4%, and 0.6%, respectively (USDA/FAS, 1997a, 1997b, 1997c, 1997e). The US import shares are small because of unfavorable import access conditions. Compared to the US, members of the EU, Central European Free TradeArea (CEFTA), and European Free Trade Area (EFTA), and many developing countries have preferential access to Eastern European markets. For example, Romanian tariffs on EU cheese imports are 18.8% whereas tariffs on US cheese imports amount to 240.0% (USDA/FAS, 1997e). Nevertheless, the US Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) considers Poland, the most populouscountry in Eastern Europe, as a top 10 emerging market worldwide (USDA/FAS, 1997c). About 2.86% or $212.1 million of US agricultural and food imports came from Eastern Europe. Eastern Europe’s most important export goods are fruit and vegetable juice, tobacco, and red meat (USDA/FAS, 1998).
2.2. Intra-Europe Trade
EU/Eastern Europe. The EU dominates Eastern Europe’s agricultural trad e. In 1995, EU exports to Eastern Europe totaled $4.4 billion—15.5 times the value of the US exports to Eastern Europe (Table 1). In most Eastern European countries imports from the EU exceed 40% of total imports. The top three EU exports were meat, fruits and vegetables, and coffee, tea, and spices. During the same time period, EU imports from Eastern Europe were $3.3 billion. Top EU imports from Eastern Europe were meat, fruits and vegetables, and live animals (OECD, 1996).
The EU’s large market s hare in Eastern Europe is due to geographic proximity and the Europe Agreements. The Europe Agreements establish bilateral preferential trade between the EU and various Eastern European and Baltic countries. Overall, the agreements appear to have promoted EU exports to Eastern Europe rather than Eastern European exports to the EU. Only Bulgaria and Hungary now have an agricultural trade surplus with the EU (Bojenc, 1996). The EU has granted limited access to Eastern European food products for which it has a surplus—often products of interest to Eastern Europe (Tangermann, 1994). Because of administrative problems, Eastern European countries have not used many preferential agreements (Frohberg & Hartmann, 1996). EU/Russia. Russia is also a major trading partner of the EU. Russia imported $4.6 billion agricultural and food products from the EU and exported $812 million products to the EU in 1995. The major EU exports to Russia are beverages, meat, and coffee, tea, and spices; top EU imports from Russia are fish, hides and skins, and oil seeds (Table 1).
In 1996, the EU accounted for 15.0% of total Russian agricultural imports while the USrepresented 9.9% of Russian imports (OECD, 1996). The EU and Russia signed a partnership and cooperation agreement in 1994. There is no evidence that US exporters face discriminatory tariffs compared to their Western European competitors.
3. WHAT IS A TECHNICAL BARRIER TO TRADE?
US/Europe agricultural trade is strongly affected by technical barriers to trade. As mentioned above there is no commonly agreed upon definition of technical barriers to trade. Researchers have proposed definitions based on intent, economic impact, and instruments used.
In this survey we follow a definition proposed by Thornsbury et al. (1997) and Roberts and DeRemer (1997). They define technical barriers as “in ternationally divergent regulations and standards governing the sale of products in national markets which have as their prima facie objective the correction of market inefficiencies stemming from externalities associated with the production, distribution, and consumption of these p roducts.” This definition includes standards of identity, measure, and quality, and SPS, global commons,
and packaging measures. It, however, excludes incentive measures such as subsidies and taxes (Roberts & DeRemer, 1997). In addition to the technical regulations, Roberts and DeRemer stress that demonstrating conformity to a foreign regulation can be a technical barrier.
Technical trade barriers differ from many other trade barriers because they can be eco nomically efficient. Moreover, SPS regulations are not “most favored nation,” i.e., different trading partners may need to comply with different conditions for gaining access to, an importing country’s market. Consequently, designing effective rules for such measures is difficult (Roberts & DeRemer, 1997). To stem the proliferation of technical barriers in recent years, GATT members negotiated Agreements on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) as part of the Uruguay Round Agreement (World Trade Organization, 1994a, 1994b). These agreements considerably strengthen international rules on the use of technical barriers. All WTO members are now subject to these agreements. The agreements specify that SPS and technical measures should not be used as disguised trade barriers or in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner. They should only be applied to the extent necessary and must be based on scientific principles and on risk assessment (World Trade Organization, 1994a, 1994b). Countries are encouraged to use international standards developed by international scientific organizations such as the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the International Office of Epizootics (OIE), and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). Countries, however, may maintain standards that are stricter than international standards, if they are justified by science or by a nondiscriminatory lower level of risk. In the absence of harmonization, WTO members are encouraged to apply the principle of equiv alency and negotiate, for example, veterinary equivalence agreements. Equivalency implies that the same level of health protection can be achieved by different methods (World Trade Organization, 1994b). Regulations and standards should be considered equivalent if one country can show that its measures—albeit different—meet the other country’s legitimate objectives. Equivalence agreements allow products to be traded with minimal customs
checks. If each side recognizes the other party’s plant insp ection procedures, visits of in spectors to foreign production and processing facilities become unnecessary. Another novel feature of the SPS agreement, the principle of regionalization, suggests that disease or pest free status should be considered on the regional rather than the country level. If a country can demonstrate that an area of its country is, and is likely to remain, disease or pest-free than importing countries should not place restrictions on goods from this area. Finally, countries cannot easily reject a panel decision based on the newly established dispute settlement mechanism any longer.
4. TECHNICAL REGULATIONS IN US/EUROPE TRADE
4.1. Overview
In a survey of FAS attaches, USDA regulatory agencies, and US trade organizations, Roberts and DeRemer (1997) identify questionable regulations in the EU, Eastern Europe, and the FSU that affected US agricultural exports in June 1996. Such barriers include market access, market expansion, and market retention barriers. Market access barriers include import bans; market expansion barriers limit but do not preclude US exports; and market retention barriers are measures under consideration, which may adversely affect US exports, if enacted. Roberts and DeRemer asked the attaches and trade organizations to estimate the trade impact of such barriers in terms of the value of current US export revenue that is threatened and could be potentially lost. Please note that the survey only covers questionable measures affecting US exports to countries covered by overseas FAS offices. It does neither cover questionable European measures affecting countries other than the US nor US measures affecting European imports.
The survey finds 57 questionable measures in Europe with an estimated trade impact on US agricultural and food exports of $899.55 million. Six of these questionable measures have an estimated individual trade impact of more than $50 million each (Table 2). Together these barriers account for 61.8% of the total
estimated trade impact. Survey respondents identified only 12 other measures worldwide with such a large impact. Roberts and DeRemer (1997) find 23 regulations in US/Europe trade with an estimated trade impact of more than $5 million.
Considering the product coverage of questionable measures, the survey shows that many barriers affecting US exports to Europe affect trade in animal products (Table 2). The estimated trade impact of all barriers on animal products is $477.3 million and accounts for 53% of estimated total trade impacts of all European barriers. By comparison, in all other countries of the world only $107.3 million exports of animal products are subjected to questionable barriers. Moreover, exports of processed foods and grains exceeding $100 million respectively are affected by questionable barriers (Roberts & DeRemer, 1997).
The USDA survey is the first comprehensive survey of technical trade barriers affecting US agricultural exports. It has shed the light on TBTs by detailing how pervasive such barriers are. However, its results should be interpreted carefully for several reasons.
1. The experts consulted are likely to be biased: the goal of FAS attaches and trade organizations is to promote US agricultural exports. The regulatory agencies used to vet their estimates are likely to take the US stance on issues such as the scientific justification and conformity of various measures with the new trade agreements.
2. Some experts may have been aware that the US may consider initiating WTO dispute settlement procedures based on their reports.
3. The survey covers market retention barriers (i.e., barriers under consideration) whose adoption and implementation are uncertain.
4. Finally, for confidentiality reasons, Roberts and DeRemer (1997) could not identify specific issues. Lacking this information, it is difficult to assess the reliability of various estimates.
Source: Thornsbury et al. (1997); Roberts and DeRemer (1997).
4.2. Specific Measures
This section identifies recent and current specific technical barriers in US/Europe agricultural trade. In addition to studying European barriers on US imports, we also explore US barriers on European imports. We identify sectors in which such barriers are prevalent and attempt to approximate their trade impact.
Our survey does not provide systematic evidence on technical barriers in US/Europe trade. This requires a detailed assessment of many standards and regulations and a comprehensive survey of exporters in many countries. Instead, our study is based on information found in research papers, newspapers, and industry and agency publications such as Agra-Europe, documents of the US Foreign Agricultural Service, and a European Commission Report on US Barriers
to Trade and Investment. We omit questionable measures not mentioned in such publications and, possibly, many TBTs related to conformity assessment and enforcement.
In this article, we attempt to approximate the trade impact of various TBTs. Unfortunate ly, with the exception of Peterson, Paggi, and Henry’s paper (1998) on the US/EU hormone dispute, quantitative economic studies on the price and welfare effects of TBTs in US/Euope trade are unavailable at this point. Occasionally, news and other sources identify the trade impact of threatened or existing barriers. If no data are available, we approximate the maximum possible impact of, for example, an import ban, by giving information on the trade volume before the ban. Note, however, that this estimate is likely to be an overstatement. Import bans are frequently linked to specific production and processing techniques. If a US processing firm follows EU guidelines, it may still be able to do business with the EU.
TABLE 3. The Approximate Trade Impact of Selected US/Europe Technical Barriers
A ine and olive oil exports correspond to total exports in the quoted year. Not all wine and olive oil may be affected by the ban.
B igure applies to total red meat rather than pork.
C astern Europe’s poultry meat imports amounted to $160 million in 1997.
Finally, please note that we do not attempt to merely pinpoint Roberts and DeRemer’s list of European technical barriers affecting US agricultural exports. The USDAsurvey constitutes a snapshot of questionable foreign technical barriers facing US agricultural exports in June 1996. Second-guessing measures identified by the USDA survey would have led us to neglect important current issues such as the EU’s threatened ban on specified risk materials. Other issues may have been resolved in the meantime. In what follows, we discuss technical barriers by region. Table 3 summarizes such barriers.
美国/欧洲农产品贸易的技术性贸易壁垒
摘要
技术性贸易壁垒严重影响了美国/欧洲的农产品贸易。一项1996年美国农业部的调查显示，有57个欧洲的贸易壁垒影响了美国的农产品出口，产生了估计有89955万美元的贸易影响。本文阐述了欧洲和美国的技术法规妨碍双边贸易。本文为个案研究提供了一个背景，并对技术性贸易壁垒的未来作用下了定论。由于贸易规则的变更，更高的食品安全和食品质量的需求以及欧盟的东欧国家，我们希望美国/欧洲的技术性贸易壁垒能够在将来得到发展。
什么是技术性贸易壁垒？
美国/欧洲的农产品贸易受到技术性贸易的强烈影响。如上所述，对于技术性贸易壁垒没有统一的定义。研究人员建议把定义建立在意图，经济影响，工具使用的基础之上。
在本次调查中，我们遵循了由Thornsbury等人（1997年）、罗伯茨和DeRemer （1997年）提出的定义。他们把技术性贸易壁垒定义为“能够管制外国产品在国内市场上销售的法规和标准,并且这些法规和标准的表面目的是为了纠正与这些产品的产、分配和消费相联系的外部作用产生的市场无效。”这一定义包括身份，措施，质量的标准，动植物卫生检疫措施，全球共同展区及包装要求。不过，该定义并不包括诸如补贴和税收（罗伯茨和DeRemer，1997）的奖励措施。除了技术法规，罗伯茨和DeRemer强调，表明符合外国法规可能成为一个技术性贸易壁垒。
技术性贸易壁垒有别于其他贸易壁垒的原因在于它可以产生经济效率。而且，动植物卫生检疫措施协议不是最惠国待遇，换言之，不同的贸易方为了获得进入一个进口国市场可能需要符合不同的条件。因此，为这些措施设计有效的规则是有难度的（罗伯茨和DeRemer，1997）。
为了遏制近年来盛行的技术性贸易壁垒，关贸总协定的成员国组织了关于动植物卫生检疫措施协议（SPS）和技术性贸易壁垒协议（TBT）的谈判，作为乌拉圭回合谈判的一部分（世界贸易组织，1994年a，1994年b）。这些协议大大加强了对技术性贸易壁垒使用的国际规则。所有世贸组织的成员国都受到了这些协议的制约。该协议规定，动植物卫生检疫措施和技术措施，不应成为变相的贸易壁垒或以武断或歧视性的方式被使用。他们应该只被适用于必要的范围之内，并且必须以科学的原则和风险评估（世界贸易组织，1994年a，1994年b）为基础。各国被鼓励使用由国际科学组织制定的国际标准，诸如食品规范委员会，国际兽疫局（OIE）和国际植物保护公约（IPPC）。但是，如果各国的理由是科学或一个非歧视性的更低水平的风险的话，他们可能保持比国际标准更为严格的标准。在协调统一的情况下，世贸组织的成员国被鼓励运用等效和谈判的原则，例
外文翻译 原文 World Trade and International Trade Material Source:https://www.doczj.com/doc/d73147173.html, Author: Ted Alax In today’s complex economic world, neither individuals nor nations are self-sufficient. Nations have utilized different economic resources; people have developed different skills. This is the foundation of world trade and economic activity. As a result of this trade and activity, international finance and banking have evolved. For example, the United States is a major consumer of coffee, yet it does not have the climate to grow any or its own. Consequently, the United States must import coffee from countries (such as Brazil, Colombia and Guatemala) that grow coffee efficiently. On the other hand, the United States has large industrial plants capable of producing a variety of goods, such as chemicals and airplanes, which can be sold to nations that need them. If nations traded item for item, such as one automobile for 10,000 bags of coffee, foreign trade would be extremely cumbersome and restrictive. So instead of batter, which is trade of goods without an exchange of money, the United State receives money in payment for what it sells. It pays for Brazilian coffee with dollars, which Brazil can then use to buy wool from Australia, which in turn can buy textiles Great Britain, which can then buy tobacco from the United State. Foreign trade, the exchange of goods between nations, takes place for many reasons. The first, as mentioned above is that no nation has all of the commodities that it needs. Raw materials are scattered around the world. Large deposits of copper are mined in Peru and Zaire, diamonds are mined in South Africa and petroleum is recovered in the Middle East. Countries that do not have these resources within their own boundaries must buy from countries that export them. Foreign trade also occurs because a country often does not have enough of a particular item to meet its needs. Although the United States is a major producer of sugar, it consumes more than it can produce internally and thus must import sugar.
景德镇陶瓷学院 毕业设计(论文)有关外文翻 译 院系：机械电子工程学院 专业：自动化 姓名：肖骞 学号： 201010320116 指导教师：万军 完成时间： 2014.5.8 说明
1、将与课题有关的专业外文翻译成中文是毕业设计（论文）中的一个不可缺少的环节。此环节是培养学生阅读专业外文和检验学生专业外文阅读能力的一个重要环节。通过此环节进一步提高学生阅读专业外文的能力以及使用外文资料为毕业设计服务，并为今后科研工作打下扎实的基础。 2、要求学生查阅与课题相关的外文文献3篇以上作为课题参考文献，并将其中1篇（不少于3000字）的外文翻译成中文。中文的排版按后面格式进行填写。外文内容是否与课题有关由指导教师把关，外文原文附在后面。 3、指导教师应将此外文翻译格式文件电子版拷给所指导的学生，统一按照此排版格式进行填写，完成后打印出来。 4、请将封面、译文与外文原文装订成册。 5、此环节在开题后毕业设计完成前完成。 6、指导教师应从查阅的外文文献与课题紧密相关性、翻译的准确性、是否通顺以及格式是否规范等方面去进行评价。 指导教师评语： 签名： 年月日
TMS320LF2407, TMS320LF2406, TMS320LF2402 TMS320LC2406, TMS320LC2404, MS320LC2402 DSP CONTROLLERS The TMS320LF240x and TMS320LC240x devices, new members of the ‘24x family of digital signal processor (DSP) controllers, are part of the C2000 platform of fixed-point DSPs. The ‘240x devices offer the enhanced TMS320 architectural design of the ‘C2xx core CPU for low-cost, low-power, high-performance processing capabilities. Several advanced peripherals, optimized for digital motor and motion control applications, have been integrated to provide a true single chip DSP controller. While code-compatible with the existing ‘24x DSP controller devices, the ‘240x offers increased processing performance (30 MIPS) and a higher level of peripheral integration. See the TMS320x240x device summary section for device-specific features. The ‘240x family offers an array of memory sizes and different peripherals tailored to meet the specific price/performance points required by various applications. Flash-based devices of up to 32K words offer a reprogrammable solution useful for: ◆Applications requiring field programmability upgrades. ◆Development and initial prototyping of applications that migrate to ROM-based devices. Flash devices and corresponding ROM devices are fully pin-to-pin compatible. Note that flash-based devices contain a 256-word boot ROM to facilitate in-circuit programming. All ‘240x devices offer at least one event manager module which has been optimized for digital motor control and power conversion applications. Capabilities of this module include centered- and/or edge-aligned PWM generation, programmable deadband to prevent shoot-through faults, and synchronized analog-to-digital conversion. Devices with dual event managers enable multiple motor and/or converter
外文翻译 原文 Firms in International Trade Material Source: https://www.doczj.com/doc/d73147173.html, Author: Andrew B. Bernard For most of its lengthy history the field of international trade largely ignored the role of the firm in mediating the flow of goods and services. Traditional trade theory explained the flow of goods between countries in terms of comparative advantage, that is, variation in the opportunity costs of production across countries and industries. Even the research focusing on differentiated varieties and increasing returns to scale that followed Helpman and Krugman continued to retain the characterization of the representative firm.?However, the assumption of a representative firm, while greatly enhancing the tractability of general equilibrium analysis, is emphatically rejected in the data. My research over the past decade has been an attempt to explore international trade from below: to understand the decisions of heterogeneous firms in shaping international trade and their effects on productivity growth and welfare. Firm Heterogeneity and Trade My early work with J. Bradford Jensen was motivated by a simple question: what do we know about firms that trade? The answer at the time was "very little" and our initial efforts focused on locating firm-level data and describing the world of exporting firms. Our first study compared exporters and non-exporters for the entire U.S. manufacturing sector and established a set of facts about exporting plants and firms.?Two major results stand out. First, only a small fraction of firms are exporters at any given time. Even in sectors where the United States is thought to have comparative advantage, such as Instruments, a majority of firms produce only for the domestic market. Similarly, some firms are exporting even in net import sectors such as Textiles and Apparel. Second, exporters are substantially and significantly different than non-exporters, even in the same industry and region. Exporters are dramatically larger, more productive, pay higher wages, use more skilled workers, and are more technology- and capital-intensive than their non-exporting counterparts. In related
南京理工大学 毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译 学院（系）：南京理工大学继续教育学院 专业：土木工程 姓名： 学号： 外文出处：学术论坛网 附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。 注：请将该封面与附件装订成册。
附件1：外文资料翻译译文 建筑类型和设计 厂房与人民息息相关，因为它提供必要的空间，工作和生活中。 由于其使用的分类，建筑主要有两种类型：工业建筑和民用建筑各工厂或工业生产中使用的工业大厦，而那些居住，就业，教育和其他社会活动的人使用的民用建筑。 工业楼宇厂房可用于加工和制造各类采矿业，冶金工业，机械制造，化学工业和纺织工业等领域。可分为两种类型的单层和多层的厂房，民用建筑，工业建筑是相同的。然而，工业与民用建筑中使用的材料，在使用它们的方式不同。 民用建筑分为两大类：住宅建筑和公共建筑，住宅建筑应满足家庭生活应包括至少有三个必要的房间：每个单位。一个客厅，一个厨房和厕所，公共建筑，可以在政治文化活动，管理工作和其他服务，如学校，写字楼，公园，医院，商店，车站，影剧院，体育场馆，宾馆，展览馆，洗浴池，等等，他们都有不同的功能，这在需要以及不同的设计类型。 房屋是人类居住。房屋的基本功能是提供遮风挡雨，但今天人们需要更他们的住房，一个家庭迁入一个新的居民区知道，如果现有住房符合其标准安全，健康和舒适。附近的房屋是如何粮店，粮食市场，学校，商店，图书馆，电影院，社区中心，家庭也会问。 在60年代中期最重要的住房价值足够空间的内部和外部。多数首选的一半左右1英亩的土地，这将提供业余活动空间单户住宅的家庭。在高度工业化的国家，许多家庭宁愿住尽量尽可能从一个大都市区的中心，“打工仔”，即使行驶一段距离，他们的工作。不少家庭的首选国家住房郊区住房的大量的，因为他们的主要目的是远离噪音，拥挤，混乱。无障碍公共交通已不再是决定性因素，在住房，因为大多数工人开着自己的车上班的人。我们主要感兴趣的安排和房间的大小和卧室数目。 在建筑设计中的一个重要的一点是，房间的布局，应提供有关它们目的，最大可能的便利，在住宅，布局可根据三类认为：“天”，“夜必须注意“和”服务“。支付提供这些地区之间容易沟通。”天“的房间，一般包括用餐室，起居室和厨房，但其他房间，如一项研究，可能会补充说，可能有一个大厅，客厅，通常是最大的，往往是作为一个餐厅，也或厨房，可有一个用餐凉亭。“夜”的房间，卧室组成。“服务”，包括厨房，卫生间，储藏室，厨房和储藏室的水厕。连接天与客房的服务。 这也是必须考虑的前景问题，从不同的房间，和那些在使用中最应该尽可能最好朝
Positioning in Practice Strategic Role of Marketing For large firms that have two or more strategic business units (SBUs), there are generally three levels of strategy: corporate-level strategy, strategic-business-unit-level (or business-level) strategy, and marketing strategy. A corporate strategy provides direction on the company's mission, the kinds of businesses it should be in, and its growth policies. A business-level strategy addresses the way a strategic business unit will compete within its industry. Finally, a marketing strategy provides a plan for pursuing the company's objectives within a specific market segment. Note that the higher level of strategy provides both the objectives and guidelines for the lower level of strategy. At corporate level, management must coordinate the activities of multiple strategic business units. Thus the decisions about the organization's scope and appropriate resource deployments/allocation across its various divisions or businesses are the primary focus of corporate strategy.Attempts to develop and maintain distinctive competencies tend to focus on generating superior financial, capital, and human resources; designing effective organizational structures and processes; and seeking synergy among the firm's various businesses. At business-level strategy, managers focus on how the SBU will compete within its industry. A major issue addressed in business strategy is how to achieve and sustain a competitive advantage. Synergy for the unit is sought across product-markets and across functional department within the unit. The primary purpose of a marketing strategy is to effectively allocate and coordinate marketing resources and activities to accomplish the firm's objectives within a specific product-market. The decisions about the scope of a marketing strategy involve specifying the target market segment(s) to pursue and the breadth of the product line to offered. At this level of strategy, firms seek competitive advantage and synergy through a well-integrated program of marketing mix elements tailored to the needs and wants of customers in the target segment(s). Strategic Role of Positioning Based on the above discussion, it is clear that marketing strategy consists of two parts: target market strategy and marketing mix strategy. Target market strategy consists of three processes: market segmentation, targeting (or target market selection), and positioning. Marketing mix strategy refers to the process of creating a unique
自动化制造系统与PLC关系 控制工程随着时间的演变。过去的人们主要致力于控制方面研究。最近电力已被应用于控制,早期电气控制是基于继电器的。这些继电器使其可以在没有机械开关的情况下被开动和关闭。这是通常使用继电器进行简单的逻辑控制的方法。低成本计算机的发展带来了新的革命,可编程逻辑控制器(PLC)出现于70年代,它已成为制造控制的最常见选择。PLC的功能受到越来越多的工厂欢迎并可能作为主要控制手段再今后的一段时间内。而这其中绝大部分原因是因为PLC 它的优点很多。 1.1梯形逻辑 梯形逻辑编程法是主要的PLC编程方法。正如之前所说,梯形逻辑已发展到模仿继电器逻辑。通过选择简单的梯形逻辑编程法,培训工程师和商人所需要的金钱极大的减少。现代控制系统仍然包括继电器,但这些都是很少的逻辑使用。字母a继电器是一个简单的装置,它使用一个磁场来控制开关,如图图1.1。当电压作用于输入线圈产生的磁场,产生电流领域。拉起磁场的金属开关,再实现它的接触和联系,关闭开关。 图1.1 简单的布局和继电器电路图 继电器的工作方式,让一个电源开关关闭另一(通常是高电流)电源,同时保持他们孤立。一个简单的例子,控制继电器应用,见图 1.2。在这方面,左边第一个接力是通常使得系统关闭,并允许电流流动,直到电压加到输入端甲,第二个中继器通常是开放的,不会允许目前的速度,目前的输入二是流经前两个继电器
然后电流流通过在第三继电器线圈,并关闭输出 C.此电路的开关会通常应用在制定阶梯逻辑形式。这可以被解释为将C逻辑作用,如果A关闭B合上的话。 图1.2一个简单的继电器控制器 图1.2中的例子没有显示整个控制系统,只有逻辑。当我们考虑一个PLC 有输入,输出,和逻辑。图1.3显示的更全面。这里有两个按钮的输入。我们可以想像激活24V直流在PLC继电器线圈的输入。反过来驱动器是一个输出继电器,开关115伏交流电,结果打开了一盏灯。请注意,在实际情况下PLC的输入继电器,常常又是输出继电器。PLC梯形图逻辑其实一种计算机程序,用户可以输入和更改它。注意,两个输入的推按钮常开,但里面的PLC梯形图逻辑有一个常开触点,和一个常闭触点。在PLC梯形逻辑图不需要匹配输入或输出。许多初学者会被抓住这点试图使阶梯逻辑匹配它的输入类型。 图1.3继电器PLC的简图 许多继电器也有多个输出(抛出),这允许输出继电器可以同时输入。图1.4所示的电路是一个例子,它是在电路里称为印章。此电路的电流流过两个电路的分支,通过接触标签A或B的输入端,B只相对乙输出。如果B是关闭的,而A 是通电,那么B将打开。如果B打开,然后输入,B将打开。打开后,乙在输出,乙将不会关闭。 图1.4电路 1.2编程
附录 F.1英文参考资料及中文翻译 F. 1 .1international trade documents role General international trade documents (international trade documents) is the international trade of use all the documents, documents and certificates collectively. Usually with international trade documents to deal with in and out of delivery of the goods El, transportation, insurance, inspection and quarantine, customs declaration, the settlement of exchange, etc. Special international trade documents usually refers to the settlement documents, especially the l/c under the way of settlement of documents. International trade documents and the use of import and export trade program closely related, the documents in the import and export enterprise work throughout the export, purchase, transportation, the whole process of the proceeds, the effort is big, timeliness strong, is broad, in addition to import and export enterprise internal between various departments the cooperation with the outside, still must and bank, customs, transportation department, insurance companies, the inspection and quarantine agencies and the relevant administrative authorities happen various contact, linked together, mutual influence, also are conditions. International trade documents for the performance of a contract is necessary means International trade is the transnational goods business, due to the particularity of the multinational business, which is the purchase and sale of the different departments are located in different countries, are remote, in most cases, the goods and payment can't perform simple direct exchange, but only as the medium of exchange with documents means. The international trade of the documents that sales of goods through the documents realization sale, the seller should not only will the actual delivery of goods export shipment, and should submit to the buyer include the title to the goods vouchers, complete documents to show real assignment. The seller/p means that the delivery of the goods, and the buyer payment is get to buy goods on behalf of property rights certificate, the deal is no longer with the goods as the core, but with documents as the core. Documents and payment of the convection principle has become the international trade of general principles of the commodity business. As international trade experts "; m Cardiff in the export trade in his book mentioned: "from a business perspective, can say CIF the purpose of the contract is not the buying and selling of goods itself, but the documents relating to the goods business." What say here "documents" is the international trade of documents. International trade documents many kinds, every kind of documents has its
building types and design A building is closely bound up with people，for it provides with the necessary space to work and live in . As classified by their use ,buildings are mainly of two types :industrial buildings and civil buildings .industrial buildings are used by various factories or industrial production while civil buildings are those that are used by people for dwelling ,employment ,education and other social activities . Industrial buildings are factory buildings that are available for processing and manufacturing of various kinds ,in such fields as the mining industry ,the metallurgical industry ,machine building ,the chemical industry and the textile industry . factory buildings can be classified into two types single-story ones and multi-story ones .the construction of industrial buildings is the same as that of civil buildings .however ,industrial and civil buildings differ in the materials used and in the way they are used . Civil buildings are divided into two broad categories: residential buildings and public buildings .residential buildings should suit family life .each flat should consist of at least three necessary rooms : a living room ,a kitchen and a toilet .public buildings can be used in politics ,cultural activities ,administration work and other services ,such as schools, office buildings, parks ,hospitals ,shops ,stations ,theatres ,gymnasiums ,hotels ,exhibition halls ,bath pools ,and so on .all of them have different functions ,which in turn require different design types as well. Housing is the living quarters for human beings .the basic function of housing is to provide shelter from the elements ,but people today require much more that of their housing .a family moving into a new neighborhood will to know if the available housing meets its standards of safety ,health ,and comfort .a family will also ask how near the housing is to grain shops ,food markets ,schools ,stores ,the library ,a movie theater ,and the community center . In the mid-1960’s a most important value in housing was sufficient space both inside and out .a majority of families preferred single-family homes on about half an acre of land ,which would provide space for spare-time activities .in highly industrialized countries ,many families preferred to live as far out as possible from the center of a metropolitan area ,even if the wage earners had to travel some distance to their work .quite a large number of families preferred country housing to suburban housing because their chief aim was to get far away from noise ,crowding ,and confusion .the accessibility of public transportation had ceased to be a decisive factor in housing because most workers drove their cars to work .people we’re chiefly interested in the arrangement and size of rooms and the number of bedrooms . Before any of the building can begin ,plans have to be drawn to show what the building will be like ,the exact place in which it is to go and how everything is to be done.
跨境电商外文文献综述 (文档含英文原文和中文翻译) 译文: 本地化跨境电子商务的模型 摘要 通过对国际供应链的B2B电子商务交易量的快速增长和伊朗快速增加的跨境交易业务，跨境电商过程的有效管理对B2B电子商务系统十分重要。本文对局部模型的结构是基于B2B电子商务的基础设施三大层，消息层、业务流程层和内容层。由于伊朗的电子商务的要求，每一层的需要适当的标准和合适的方案的选择。当电子文件需要移动顺利向伊朗，建议文件的标准为文件内容支持纸质和电子文件阅读。验证提出的模型是通过案例研究方法呈现一到四阶段的情景。本文试图通过交换商业文件在贸易过程中这一局部模型，实现在全球电子贸易供应链更接近区域单一窗口建设的关键目标。 关键词：电子商务;跨境贸易;电子文档管理;国际供应链
1.简介 电子商务是关于在互联网或其他网络电子系统购买和销售产品或服务。术语B2B（企业对企业），描述了企业间的电子商务交易，如制造商和批发商，或批发商和零售商之间。本文的研究目标是上两个不同国家贸易商之间的通信。今天的世界贸易组织的主要目标之一是建立区域单一窗口，可以提高世界各地的贸易便利化。建立区域单一窗口需要跨境海关，可以有效地交换贸易文件。因此，首先，简化跨境贸易文件的关键在于朝着国家单一窗口移动。然后，区域单一窗口可以授权国家之间的通信。电子商务模型是基于三个主要逻辑层的研究。这三个层消息传输层，业务处理层和内容层。本文的局部模型是一种能够自动交换读取文件的过程。通过与东亚和中东国家的建立区域单一窗口可以在将来得到改善的更多的互操作性，从而建立伊朗国家单一窗口 在本文的第二部分讨论引进国际供应链中的跨境B2B模式所需的基本概念和标准。第三部分介绍在大的模型中引入的组件功能和范围。第四部分讨论了B2B交易层模型的定位，最后结束本文。 2.背景 在本节中，除了了解B2B电子商务在伊朗的情况，还有参考模型的背景等概念以及讨论B2B电子商务跨境模式的本土化。 2.1 B2B电子商务在伊朗 如今伊朗在贸易进程的变现是一个关键的贸易成功点。伊朗和许多其他国家接壤，它的进口和出口过程可以通过公路，铁路，海上和空中的方式来完成。因此，这个国家的中部和战略作用，使得它在亚洲和中东地区货物运输的主要贸易点。今天，在伊朗海关几乎所有的贸易过程通过纸质表格完成，由商务部提供的电子服务仅限于谁该国境内交易的商人。今天，伊朗海关几乎所有的贸易流程都是通过纸质表格来完成的，商务部给出的电子服务只限于该国的商人。介绍了模型试图简化在伊朗交易的跨境电子商务供应链交换电子文件的过程。这里提到的一些系统，由商务部在伊朗的电子服务被提及：进口订单管理系统。贸易统计制度。伊朗法典伊朗。这些电子系统的主要使用，以促进在伊朗贸易过程。这里提到的系统作为独立的贸易者可与建议本文模型在未来的作用。在亚洲的区域性单
1、 外文原文 A: Fundamentals of Single-chip Microcomputer Th e si ng le -ch i p mi cr oc om pu ter is t he c ul mi nat i on o f bo th t h e d ev el op me nt o f th e d ig it al com p ut er an d t he int e gr at ed ci rc ui t a r gu ab ly th e t ow m os t s i gn if ic ant i nv en ti on s o f t h e 20t h c en tury [1]. Th es e to w typ e s of a rc hi te ctu r e ar e fo un d i n s in gl e -ch ip m i cr oc om pu te r. So m e em pl oy t he sp l it p ro gr am /d ata me mo ry o f th e H a rv ar d ar ch it ect u re , sh ow n in Fi g.3-5A-1, o th ers fo ll ow t he p h il os op hy , wi del y a da pt ed f or ge n er al -p ur po se co m pu te rs a nd m i cr op ro ce ss o r s, of ma ki ng no lo gi c al di st in ct io n be tw ee n p ro gram a n d da ta m em or y a s i n th e Pr in cet o n ar ch it ec tu re, sh ow n in F i g.3-5A -2. In g en er al te r ms a s in gl e -chi p m ic ro co mp ut er i s c h ar ac te ri ze d b y th e i nc or po ra tio n o f al l t he uni t s o f a co mp ut er i n to a s in gl e d ev i ce , as s ho wn in Fi g3-5A -3. Fig.3-5A-1 A Harvard type Fig.3-5A-2. A conventional Princeton computer Program memory Data memory CPU Input& Output unit memory CPU Input& Output unit